paulitician
Platinum Member
- Oct 7, 2011
- 38,401
- 4,162
- 1,130
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nJ_sLDWZdc8]Ron Paul's Fantastic Speech After Taking 2nd In New Hampshire - YouTube[/ame]
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
And he will blame the anarchy that follows on who?
And he will blame the anarchy that follows on who?
And he will blame the anarchy that follows on who?
Yes because we all know Freedom has to = 'Anarchy.'
And he will blame the anarchy that follows on who?
Yes because we all know Freedom has to = 'Anarchy.'
Freedom doesn't but a total lack of oversight does.
I'm all for cutting responsibly but Paul wants to cut laws and regulations with a butcher knife.
yes... the freedom to segregate blacks and whites...
the freedom to sexually harass women at work.
And he will blame the anarchy that follows on who?
You know there's a rather large difference between anarchy and libertarianism right?
And he will blame the anarchy that follows on who?
You know there's a rather large difference between anarchy and libertarianism right?
How so? It would quickly devolve to anarchy, except if some libertarian principles are ignored. Even the smallest government would need some funds. What if I refuse to pay? Would they be sending "men with guns" or just a strongly worded note?
And he will blame the anarchy that follows on who?
You know there's a rather large difference between anarchy and libertarianism right?
How so? It would quickly devolve to anarchy, except if some libertarian principles are ignored. Even the smallest government would need some funds. What if I refuse to pay? Would they be sending "men with guns" or just a strongly worded note?
Most libertarians would agree that we need to provide the government the funds needed so that it can operate. if they disagree with that then they disagree with the constitution. With a smaller government the demands for funding would be much less and other income sources would be adequate. Ron Paul would like to do away with the income tax and would push for lower taxes whenever possible. It's up to congress to change the tax code but he can put pressure on them.
yes... the freedom to segregate blacks and whites...
the freedom to sexually harass women at work.
yes... the freedom to segregate blacks and whites...
the freedom to sexually harass women at work.
Out of curiosity, since you can't be bothered to learn what libertarian views actually are, why do you feel compelled to comment on them?
How so? It would quickly devolve to anarchy, except if some libertarian principles are ignored. Even the smallest government would need some funds. What if I refuse to pay? Would they be sending "men with guns" or just a strongly worded note?
Most libertarians would agree that we need to provide the government the funds needed so that it can operate. if they disagree with that then they disagree with the constitution. With a smaller government the demands for funding would be much less and other income sources would be adequate. Ron Paul would like to do away with the income tax and would push for lower taxes whenever possible. It's up to congress to change the tax code but he can put pressure on them.
You didn't answer the question about refusal to pay. What if I ignored or worked my way around paying taxes. How does a libertarian government handle that without resorting to "men with guns"?
And he will blame the anarchy that follows on who?
Ron Paul hasn't done jack-shit in 30 years but run his mouth. How is he going to "restore freedom"??
Ron Paul hasn't done jack-shit in 30 years but run his mouth. How is he going to "restore freedom"??
By running his mouth. By the power of the veto. By commanding the troops to come home. By cutting spending as described in his budget proposal.
Ultimately it will be we the people that restore freedom, but Dr. Paul is going to show us the way.
Balanced budget by year 3.